Mission Statement: Herculodge: The Essential Guide to Saving Your Manhood in an Era of Shriveling Masculinity.
I can be e-mailed at herculodge@verizon.net

September 07, 2012

My Disdain for a Watch's Lack of Lume Likens Me to a Yuppie SUV Driver

Angelo makes a piquant comparison:

Question: You put a knock on a couple of your Invictas for not having strong enough lume----"accusing" them of being "fashion watches." My question is-----if you aren't actually using the lume brightness for diving or as a mercenary in a dark jungle somewhere----does it make that much of a difference? If you get a Seiko or some other fine brand that has strong lume----but you're not really using the lume for those purposes, isn't it all about fashion anyway? Like a Range Rover with incredible off-road capability----but the yuppies who own it won't drive it in the snow----leave it parked in the garage in bad weather. The only time I've wished I had strong lume is in movie theaters----with my phone off. And for something like that, a basic Timex Indiglo style watch for thirty bucks has you covered. Or if you have one watch with great lume, THAT can be your official movie theater watch. What do you think?

My Thoughts:

I stand guilty as charged. If a watch is called a diver especially, I think on principle, whether I need the lume or not, it should have strong lume. Especially if it costs over $200. Also, I nap in my office with the lights off and like to read my watch so I know when I need to get up for my class. Not exactly snorkeling in Tahiti but there you go.

I'm afraid I have to disagree with Angelo. Lume is, after all, just paint. For lack of that paint, your watch becomes unreadable in dim light. So now you're supposed to plan ahead and, in any situation you might be in dim light or darkness, wear a different watch. Or be sure to carry a cell phone to check the time (when, often, I choose to carry mine in a messenger bag, so that digging it out takes far more time than glancing at my wrist.) None of this is the end of the world, but it's a lot of price to pay, in terms of inconvenience, for the absence of a penny's worth of paint.

Second, although I do not like diver's watches (my favorite is an utterly simple military style Citizen Eco-Drive, much simpler and smaller than a diver's watch) I gather the attraction is supposed to be their ruggedness and utility under any condition you could conceivably face. As in "I can count on this watch in any conditions that wouldn't kill me." A watch that is useless when you step into a darkened bedroom for your slippers fails that theme. Hoo boy, does it ever.

Third, unlike the Range Rover which is big, heavy, inefficient, and clumsy, a watch with lume has no disadvantages compared to one without. If you need it, you will definitely know the difference. If you don't need it, its presence makes no difference at all. It's a win-no way to lose situation. So why not have the lume?

The purpose of a watch is to be there when you need it so you can look at it and know what time it is. The artsy-fartsy jewelry designer wing of the watch company only has one serious engineering constraint on them; whatever else they do, they MUST keep enough contrast between the watch dial and the hands so that you can read what time it is. Yet they refuse to do it, because they think (say) silver hands on a silver dial look cool. If that's not sacrificing all function just for style, I don't know what is. Until they decide it's stylish just to leave the hands off altogether, of course.

But Bill, we're talking about a guy (Herculodge) who is considering selling off some of his 40 watches OF ONE BRAND. Surely, if you're someone who collects watches by the dozen, you can tolerate a few of them being "fashion forward" without regard to strong lume. I'm sure he enjoys deciding which radio he's going to use in a given room, on a given day----so planning ahead to say "Hmmmm....it's theater night, I need my Seiko because of the strong lume" is second nature to him----maybe even preferable! If you are a person who is going to buy one watch----a swiss army knife if you will, that has to do everything, than yes----durability, lume, accuracy, etc., all must figure into the equation. Certainly, a nice Casio G Shock might fit that bill for under a 100 bucks. Also----I challenge whether it's really true that superior lume is only a penny per watch. If it's true that cost isn't a factor, then I'm really confused why any watch you get in a ceral box----or a vending machine----or free at a trade show----or you buy from Wal-Mart for $9.99 doesn't have glowing lume on par with Jeff's Seiko. If it's that easy and cheap, why isn't the whole watch world using the same strong lume? it seems that there is a consistency that the more expensive watches have better glowing capability that lasts longer after sundown.

I agree with Angelo here, as I imply in another post. Of course it comes down to the individual, and what is important to him or her (usually him with regards to watches). I think we can all agree that, as a general rule, the stronger the lume the better, but I own watches in which strong lume would take away from the aesthetics of it. Take the all-black "combat" Ocean Speedway (0762), for instance. It only has very faint lume on its hands, yet part of the charm of its "day-time" look is that it is all-black with hints of grey. If it had brighter lume and thus whiter hands this look would be reduced.

But I think the key here is that most watch collectors - say, someone who has more watches than they actually need (we'll just say "more than a few") - have a variety of watches for different purposes and occasions. If I need strong lume than I'll wear my Seiko or Citizen, but if I want to wear a big, flashy watch then I'll wear an Invicta.

I have never met a watch that fulfills all possible purposes and occasions. Even if I owned a Breitling Super Avenger I'd never wear it camping or while going for a hike.

My Subaqua Speciality Reserves are good examples of fashion watches that I enjoy with poor lume. However, my highest esteem is for watches that are great fashion and great function/lume such as the Seiko Velatura models with 50mm cases and the Eco Drive BJ2115 models. There are others but the point is style and function need not be mutually exclusive.

I agree, and would only add that not every watch needs to be or do everything. I'm OK with the fact that some of my watches have poor lume but look great, some have great lume but look good, and a few have great lume and look great. Ideally it would be both, but some of my great looking watches might actually look less great with beefy slabs of lume on the hands.